The home of former Washington Times reporter Audrey Hudson, whose work can now be read at outlets such as Newsmax and the Colorado Observer, was raided by personnel from the Department of Homeland Security and Maryland State Police. Hudson recently revealed that the raid took place in August.

From the Daily Caller article:

A search warrant obtained by TheDC indicates that the August raid allowed law enforcement to search for firearms inside her home.

The document notes that her husband, Paul Flanagan, was found guilty in 1986 to resisting arrest in Prince George’s County. The warrant called for police to search the residence they share and seize all weapons and ammunition because he is prohibited under the law from possessing firearms.

But without Hudson’s knowledge, the agents also confiscated a batch of documents that contained information about sources inside the Department of Homeland Security and the Transportation Security Administration, she said.

Read the rest here.

Hudson says the seizure of her confidential files was outside the scope of the search warrant, which allowed for the confiscation of weapons owned by her husband, but did not allow officers to confiscate her papers.

https://twitter.com/rsmccain/status/393753840765267968

https://twitter.com/Mike63869007/status/393776198230097921

Are confiscations of reporters’ documents, wiretaps on their phones and hacks into their computer systems the new normal?

https://twitter.com/DostoevskyGhost/status/393776906950033408

Twitchy will update this story as it develops.

***

Related:

James Rosen discovers possible upside to government spying on him

‘Appalling’: Brit Hume raps FBI chief over ‘potted plant defense’ in James Rosen case

Bombshell: Ryan Lizza reports that DOJ fought to conceal warrant from James Rosen

NBC: Eric Holder signed off on criminal investigation of Fox News’ James Rosen

Outrageous: Did Justice Department seize phone records of James Rosen’s parents?

Frightening: Content from DOJ’s warrant application to spy on James Rosen [pics]

Chilling report: Obama’s DOJ spied on Fox News’ James Rosen; Criminalizes reporting; Update: Fox issues statement

Sharyl Attkisson: CBS confirmed my computer was hacked ‘on multiple occasions’

  • pairadimes

    America, you have two choices. 1) do something about the encroaching police state, or 2) watch it get much worse.

    • Collardet Chiffonier

      We live in a country where most folks are too lazy and removed to do anything about injustice of any sort, and the entrenched military-industrial-corporate complex is taking advantage of that apathy (regardless of which party happens to be in power at the time). Your choice of icon doesn’t give me hope that you are part of the solution, but I would love to be proven wrong.

      • pairadimes

        Too many Americans today live in fear of the freedoms that should be our legacy. As a result, our government grows larger and larger with every promise to address these fears, and as it does, the moneyed interests capture more and more of the apparatus of this government. Soon, we will have neither liberty nor security. Your comment about my avatar suggests you have much yet to learn about the lessons of history, and what we should be learning from them.

      • Chris

        so you have NEVER seen someone take a pic of a dictator or obama and have it as a “twist”? are you new to the internet or something? wake up dummy

  • me

    What a way for the current ‘government’ to terrorize anyone that opposes their agendas and to silence their critics. So trendy and Stalinesque of them. Stay classy, DC!

  • Republicanvet

    I wonder who ordered this? Would they do something so blatant without the Spite House OK?

    • http://twitter.com/thetugboatphil TugboatPhil ✓Mate

      Eric Holder. He has blanket permission to do anything he wants, whether legal or not.

    • MagPie

      You know this has Eric Holder written all over it. Get a search warrant by lying about the reason.

    • rssllue

      Once they get the right to enter, Holder makes sure the homeowner has no rights whatsoever. This guy is treating warrants and the law with a cannon (general cause) rather than a rifle (specific cause) like it should be. Welcome to the progressive utopia.

  • Pushfoot

    I commented about this on the Blaze a while ago, too. I was so appalled when I read the story, and then as I thought about how far we’ve sunk to allow such an unlawful seizure, I realized that this sort of thing happens regularly in the police drama TV programs; a bad guy is deeply ensconced, the police find some dumb little excuse to get permission to enter, the sympathetic judge signs a warrant, and they search the home, uncovering evidence or victims or whatever in the basement, on the computer, or whatever. How many times have I watched those programs and applauded the creativity of the detectives? The ends justify the means.

    I am horrified to realize that I had been brainwashed by the media to see these tactics as heroic. They are not. They are rights violations.

    • Squirrel!

      Turn off the TV. Every bit of media is like this.

  • Stephen L. Hall #NonquamTrump

    I would like to say that this surprises me . . . I would really like to say that.

  • CHHR

    I’ve been following Audrey for several years… she’s done some amazing reporting related to terrorist activity and DHS/TSA security breaches… now that Elibiary has such an “honorable” position within DHS, I can’t help but wonder…

  • The Penguin, Don’t talk shit

    So now this is becoming commonplace. Total disregard for the 1st amendment. A police state is coming? The police state is here.

    • Catchance

      …and the second and the fourth.

  • dwsmokin

    And so it accelerates-Berlin, Moscow….Washington.

  • HanaFiveO

    Think about this, they had to go back to 1986 to find a current possible violation of law that didn’t exist at the time of her husbands conviction. Who the heck in their right mind would authorize that warrant?
    Then they went outside the scope of that warrant to seize docs that were obtained legally. Return of service is required, who is the judge allowing this?
    Be afraid, be very afraid.

    • The Penguin, Don’t talk shit

      We’re witnessing just the tip of the iceberg here. It’s gonna get baaaad before it get’s worse.

  • HeavyMetalPolkaMonkey

    We all have an obligation to get on-board with Dear Leader’s program. If not, well then no unicorn for you.

    • Squirrel!

      Please tell me that is not a real website.

      • HeavyMetalPolkaMonkey

        Yeah, I know. I feel that way every time I look at MSNBC.

        • Squirrel!

          Ahahahaha!! I don’t pay for cable or dish so that’s not a problem for me.

  • FreedomFighter

    K.G.B

  • RumDoooogie

    welcome to amerika

  • ObamaFail

    Remember that time a Republican was doing this stuff to journalists? No? Me neither.

    • Collardet Chiffonier

      Apparently you forgot about how Richard Nixon explored the option of having journalist Jack Anderson murdered because of all the bad press he was delivering against his administration. Look it up.

      • Catchance

        I believe the operative word here is “explored”. He also tried to have the IRS audit his “enemies” and the FBI check their backgrounds. But back then the IRS and the FBI had integrity and wouldn’t do it. Look it up.

        • Collardet Chiffonier

          No, I really think the operative word here is “murder”. If you had actually taken the time to research it, you would see how far that exploration went. But the fact that you assert that J. Edgar Hoover’s FBI “had integrity” leads me to believe you’re not that interested in research.

  • http://reaganff.tumblr.com/ reaganFF

    This just sent cold chills up my spine. I don’t recognize my beloved country any longer.

  • therealguyfaux ✓ᵛᵉʳᶦᶠᶦᵉᵈ

    Professor Alan Dershowitz, whatever one thinks of him, has made the excellent point that, since the result of an unwarranted search is that the evidence uncovered is barred from being admitted as evidence in any court proceeding bearing on the guilt or innocence of a person potentially to be accused– suppose there never WAS any intent to prosecute?

    What he argued was that the Government could come into your house, look around, possibly confiscate certain things, and then decide, conveniently, “Oops, made a mistake– sorry!” and give you your stuff back (after having copied it, of course). He argued that, in the case of a foreign terrorist, you might decide you had enough evidence against him already, and you could beat the daylights out of him to obtain information unrelated to any charges against him, seeing as he would face no extra jail time as a result of anything he said. Such a person is hardly likely to bring a deprivation-of-civil-rights case.

    It would be more likely you could bring one for an unwarranted search and seizure, but you’d have a hard time showing damages, other that maybe your door kicked in, because presumably you are not physically injured. Sure, you might collect a token amount for emotional distress, which the Government might offer you, along with making you sign a confidentiality form.

    Dershowitz’s point was that it might be worth it to the Government, on a balance-of-harms analysis, to violate people’s rights if it produced valuable intel which would save lives and property, with presumably no deprivation of either the life or the liberty, nor any permanent deprivation of the property of those whose rights were in the moment violated.

    • Jim Denney

      “Dershowitz’s point was that it might be worth it to the Government, on a
      balance-of-harms analysis, to violate people’s rights if it produced
      valuable intel which would save lives and property….”
      I guess Mr. Dershowitz, as a liberal, can’t imagine a scenario where the government would have entirely political motivations for launching a commando confiscation of private property? The Creep from Chicago and his boy toy attorney general don’t do ANYTHING that’s not political and/or financially corrupt.

      • therealguyfaux ✓ᵛᵉʳᶦᶠᶦᵉᵈ

        Well, you see, it’s the Chicago Way.
        Actually, Dershowitz is a bit more clear-eyed on that issue than you give him credit for. He’d rather it was confined to just for use against foreign nationals.

  • thinker

    And liberals stay silent…or do they just not know. I know some libs that don’t even listen to news…and they are successful. They have no clue what is going on.

    • Karl H

      If you stay focused on a small task you can be successful like a specialized insect and remain ignorant of the truth of your personal beliefs thus ensuring you never have to take a stand on principles that might hurt your success or worse.

      In the past we called them ignorant cowards today they are known as Democrats and RIno’s

  • SpaceRacer423

    Wait, he was convicted of “resisting arrest” and that is enough to prevent him from owning a gun?
    What a BS way of taking away someone’s rights.
    The story says nothing about him being convicted of what he was arrested for.
    So basically the police can accuse you of anything, arrest you at any time, and if you protest they’ll convict you of “resisting” whether of not the original arrest was warranted
    Then years later, they can use that convection as an excuse to raid your home at any time.
    Welcome to the USSA.

    • Squirrel!

      Is resisting arrest a felony? If not, are people being banned from owning firearms for misdemeanors?

      • b_truit

        depends. There are M and F resisting charges. If injury or if there is danger to life or limb it can t be upgraded to F. Maryland is as liberal as it gets now. so i would assume they slam everyone with a felony. resist.

        • Squirrel!

          Thanks for the info. I didn’t think of the many aspects of what resisting could be. Kinda thought it might have something to do with being in MD too. Nonetheless, I think that was an excuse for grabbing docs.

          • b_truit

            You couldnt be more correct. Im in that line of work..This was nothing more than an excuse to swipe documents, plain and simple. No officer, and I mean No officer grabs items outside the scope of the warrant, especially by mistake. It was willful. The fed boys dont get to do real cop work like we do here at the state level. Give ’em and inch they take a mile.

          • Squirrel!

            So what are your thoughts on the 30 man swat team raiding a family home, traumatizing children and coming out with spent ammo. In DC. Have you read about that?

            And to you: State law enforcement is always so well trained and in my experience very professional.

          • b_truit

            I read about the guy who got arrested for the spent casing..its bull crap. yea its the law over there in DC but that does not mean its not absurd. Not sure why people put liberals in charge of lawmaking. Ive met some good fed boys like myself that are NRA, Tea Party and oath keepers, but in the last few years im not sure who or what they are hiring. I do know when we do serve warrants on a house (when the person really does need to go to jail) that if the feds are around, we make sure they “secure the perimeter” in other words back up and let the guys who actually do this for a living do it. I dont want an AD (accidental discharge) in my back. Most State guys are squared away and professional. Heck we spend a year of our lives getting screamed at and starved in the academy. Appreciate the compliment. Stay safe and carry always. (unless your in DC ha)

          • Squirrel!

            I just thought overkill and no reason to traumatize children that way. Actually, it’s insanity. Understand D.C. has f’d laws. I’m nowhere in the vicinity of D.C. but I do have to go to my kids’ school every day, which is the equivalent, and I’m one of those law abiders.

  • Paul C.

    DHS = Obama’s SS

  • Squirrel!

    If the media would end its complicity things would be much different.

  • Adam Johnson

    Whatever happened to the “bigger than a bread box” rule? You have to be searching areas where what you’re looking for could hide. So if you’re looking for a gun and open a drawer full of files, you can take the files out to see if there’s a gun under them, but you can’t hide a gun in a file folder, which they obviously opened if they knew what the documents were when they took them. Since a gun is bigger than a file folder (so to speak), legally they couldn’t even LOOK in the files. Finally, since when does the Coast Guard, representing DHS, show up for a weapons check on a convict? Was his felony conviction from a federal court? If not, you’ve proven that the search warrant was bogus, and an excuse to get into the house to take docs.

    • Squirrel!

      Houseboat? Thought Coast Guard searching by direction of DHS is odd. Coast Guard is under Sec of Defense or Sec of Homeland?

      • b_truit

        I think CG is under homeland. not under DOD.

        • Squirrel!

          You’re full of the information. :-)
          I thought they were military. I can see how they’d be under DHS. Just didn’t think they were. At this point what difference does it make?

          • Adam Johnson

            They patrol U.S. Harbors and Coast Lines, making them responsible for domestic security in the water, thus Homeland Security.

          • Squirrel!

            Makes total sense. Who were they under before DHS existed? Sorry, inquiring mind here. I’ll look it up myself.

          • Squirrel!

            Here we go. USCG website “About Us” says only military branch operating under Homeland Security. Also has a Missions page that said they are under the Dept. of the Navy. Blurred lines.

            http://www.uscg.mil/top/about/

          • Adam Johnson

            Okay, I just looked at Title X and Title XIV of the USC. USCG is under DHS since 2002, 1976-2002 DOT, and prior to that, it’s job was to collect maritime customs duties and therefore fell under Treasury. This is under times of peace, and are exempt from Posse Comitatus in order to function as a law enforcement entity on our coastlines. They can be transferred to Dept. Of The Navy anytime by the President, or during wartime by Congress.

          • Squirrel!

            USCG: The red-headed stepchild of the military. :-)

  • Jeremy

    Obama’s thugs up to their usual tactics.

  • Adam Johnson

    They definitely took advantage of her husband’s status to gain a bogus warrant. When a judge signed it, I’ll bet he/she never even dreamed feds would accompany the local LEOs to verify a simple “felon in possession of firearms” warrant. The smartest thing news organizations can do at this point is install a safe with magnetic lock lockers inside it. It should be on-site and have magnetic lock lockers with biometrics. Then each reporter is assigned one locker for storage of files, and no one should EVER have docs at home anymore. Let’s see them get a warrant to search the “informant fileWhen I read 1984, saw it as a school assignment (class of 84 btw) but apparently the President saw it as a how-to manual.

  • Sarah Goodwich

    Officials generally are only a hair away from shredding the Constitution, generally feeling their oats to see what they can get away with under the whatever adminisration happens to be in power. For example, it wasn’t any accident that the Waco and Ruby Rudge incidents occurred when Bill Clinton took over, since the FBI and BATF knew they could get away with it; and likewise we see similar abuses under Obama who has already killed US citizens without Due Process, while jailing people for offending Muslims and turned his back on our own personnel at Benghazi.

  • Rick Hatfield

    Where is CNN and the rest of the liberal media on this story? I guess it is not news worthy compared to “waiter does not get tip because he is gay” The liberal media just loves obama to a major fault in the checks and balances of our country.